Re: [PATCH v13 0/3] perf: Add Raspberry Pi AXI PMU driver
Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 17/08/2026 08:57, Ian Rogers wrote: > On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 11:20 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 15/08/2026 19:27, Ian Rogers wrote: >>> Motivation & Background >>> ============================== >>> Currently, Linux lacks a standard perf-API compatible driver for the >>> Broadcom AXI performance counter blocks on Raspberry Pi platforms. Prior >>> out-of-tree vendor solutions relied on custom debugfs nodes and ad-hoc >>> kthreads, preventing integration with standard Linux perf tooling (`perf stat`, >>> `perf list`, etc.). >>> >> >> Slow down! >> >> One version per 24h in normal cycle, not 13 patchsets in two days! (and >> even rarer during the merge window) > > I'm familiar with perf-tools which was set up to follow BPF's example, > both have -next repos. The -next repos merge into linux-next for > testing. I agree that cherry-picking shouldn't be done straight into a > pull request to Linus. Is there a principle against using -next and > linux-next? How is this relevant? I don't think you read my comment. Best regards, Krzysztof